Volume change behaviour and microstructure of stabilized loess under cyclic freeze–thaw conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Freeze–thaw action is considered to be one of the most destructive actions that can induce significant damage in stabilized subgrades in seasonally frozen loess areas. Laboratory tests including frost heave – thaw shrinkage and microstructure change during freeze–thaw cycles were conducted to evaluate the volume change rate of loess stabilized with cement, lime, and fly ash under the impact of cyclic freeze–thaw conditions. The loess specimens collapsed after eight freeze–thaw cycles (192 h), but most stabilized loess specimens had no visible damage after all freeze–thaw cycles were completed. All of the stabilized loess samples underwent a much smaller volume change than the loess alone after the freeze–thaw cycles. Although surface porosity and equivalent diameter of stabilized loess samples increased, the stabilized loess can retain its microstructure during freeze–thaw cycles when the cement content was less than 6%. To ensure freeze–thaw resistance of stabilized loess subgrades, the mix proportions of the three additives was recommended to be 4 to 5% cement, 6% lime, and 10% fly ash.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".